W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > January to March 2007

Re: rq25 (1.18) review (part I)

From: Kendall Clark <kendall@monkeyfist.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2007 19:04:04 -0500
Message-Id: <19CC5726-58EE-4990-AAC9-5942DBCD708D@monkeyfist.com>
Cc: dawg mailing list <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
To: Lee Feigenbaum <feigenbl@us.ibm.com>

On Mar 6, 2007, at 4:57 PM, Lee Feigenbaum wrote:

> I believe that Andy was responding that "used to show each triple
> explicitly" is not meta-commentary, as it is commenting on Turtle  
> rather
> than on SPARQL. I've changed the wording to:
> """
> This document uses the Turtle data format to show each triple  
> explicitly.
> """

This is much clearer. Thanks.

> I considered a clause at the end of the parentheticals along the  
> lines of
> ", with the changes from URIs to IRIs noted above", but believe the
> section is clearer as is.

So it seems settled, then. Fine.

>> Ouch. Well, there is a Unicode form for browsers that are broken; I
>> wasn't suggesting "&ndash;" explicitly as just reminding about the
>> conventional orthography, which may be implemented in a few diff  
>> ways.
> In the interests of time and lacking the resources to thoroughly  
> audit the
> document for ranges and Web browsers for the most supported way to  
> express
> en dashes, I've chosen to ignore this orthographic error. If you  
> have the
> resources to address this, I'd be glad to commit the changes.

If W3C doc Q&A doesn't catch this and make us fix it (I don't know if  
it will or won't, but it's pretty careful, as I recall), then who am  
I to care?

But, FWIW, it's not that complicated to fix:


Received on Wednesday, 7 March 2007 00:04:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:00:53 UTC